休息三分鐘就要被公司開除，這樣的事情聽起來匪夷所思，但居然是真的！

廣州一店長(zhǎng)因休息3分鐘被開除

2021年3月，余某入職品某公司任店長(zhǎng)，負(fù)責(zé)管理該公司位于某廣場(chǎng)的門店。2024年9月26日，品某公司區(qū)域經(jīng)理通過微信告知余某，其工號(hào)將于當(dāng)日作廢。雙方均確認(rèn)勞動(dòng)關(guān)系于當(dāng)日解除。

A store manager in Guangzhou, Guangdong province, was fired for taking a three-minute rest break, with the court ruling that the company must pay compensation. Yu joined a Company as a store manager in March 2021. On Sept 26, 2024, the company's regional manager notified Yu via WeChat that his employment was terminated.

公司主張，余某在工作時(shí)間、店內(nèi)有顧客時(shí)坐于收銀臺(tái)凳子上睡覺，被商場(chǎng)人員投訴；其管理的門店曾在營(yíng)業(yè)時(shí)間關(guān)閉店門，違反商場(chǎng)制度，導(dǎo)致公司無法繼續(xù)租賃該場(chǎng)地，產(chǎn)生嚴(yán)重?fù)p失，故解除勞動(dòng)合同合法。

余某表示，2024年9月某日被商場(chǎng)人員投訴一事確實(shí)存在，但其從9時(shí)30分開始上班至當(dāng)日22時(shí)30分下班，當(dāng)天門店所有工作均由其一人完成。20時(shí)許，當(dāng)天上班已超8小時(shí)，出現(xiàn)生理性疲憊，因?yàn)楣ぷ魈郏诘首由闲艘粫?huì)，實(shí)際沒有睡著。且品某公司也無證據(jù)證明自己沒有接待客人，客人進(jìn)來時(shí)自己有接待，只是太累就坐了一下，閉眼休息了3分鐘而已。至于2024年8月某日閉店一事，系因當(dāng)日店內(nèi)僅一名店員，其上廁所期間短暫關(guān)門。

The company claimed Yu was fired legitimately due to two incidents: first, he allegedly slept at the cashier's desk during business hours while customers were present, leading to a complaint from mall staff; second, his store temporarily closed during operating hours, violating mall regulations and causing significant financial losses by jeopardizing the company's lease.

Yu acknowledged the September 2024 complaint but explained he had worked alone for 13 hours (9:30 am to 10:30 pm) that day. Around 8 pm, physically exhausted after over eight hours of work, he sat on a stool with his eyes closed for three minutes but did not sleep. Regarding the August 2024 store closure, Yu said it occurred when the sole staff member used the restroom.

公司被判賠近5萬元

據(jù)報(bào)道，廣州市南沙區(qū)人民法院一審判決，品某公司向余某支付工資差額217.2元、住房補(bǔ)貼3000元、違法解除勞動(dòng)合同賠償金49572.24元，駁回公司全部訴訟請(qǐng)求，判決已生效。

The Nansha District People's Court in Guangzhou ruled that the company must pay Yu 217.2 yuan in back wages, 3,000 yuan in housing subsidies, and 49,572.24 yuan in compensation for unlawful termination.

圖源：視覺中國(guó)

法官表示，余某連續(xù)工作超8小時(shí)，公司未安排人員頂崗，其疲憊時(shí)閉眼休息是正常生理現(xiàn)象，現(xiàn)有證據(jù)無法證明其長(zhǎng)時(shí)間睡眠及影響銷售。8月某日閉店是因上廁所，余某已作出合理解釋。

品某公司雖提供了視頻，但該時(shí)長(zhǎng)為2秒的視頻僅顯示余某手扶著頭閉著眼靠在背板上，不足以證明余某處于長(zhǎng)時(shí)間睡眠狀態(tài)，也未能顯示影響門店正常的銷售工作和造成直接經(jīng)濟(jì)損失。

法官指出，余某行為并非嚴(yán)重過錯(cuò)，公司無證據(jù)證明其行為造成責(zé)罰規(guī)定中的“嚴(yán)重?fù)p失”，解除合同缺乏事實(shí)及法律依據(jù)，屬違法解除。

法官提示，休息權(quán)是勞動(dòng)者基本權(quán)利，企業(yè)應(yīng)維護(hù)勞動(dòng)者休息權(quán)，助力自身高質(zhì)量發(fā)展。

The court stated that Yu's actions did not constitute gross misconduct, and the company lacked proof of "severe losses" justifying dismissal. The judge said that rest is a fundamental labor right, urging employers to protect this right to achieve sustainable development.

來源：中國(guó)青年報(bào)央視網(wǎng)等

China Daily精讀計(jì)劃

每天20分鐘，英語(yǔ)全面提升！